Facial Depth - Defined

[Deleted member 19957]

High IQ thread, do you have some kind of bio engineering backround or smth?

 

[Aypo129]

View attachment 2041087

Jfl accurate

 

[tomakine]

im a good candidat for that whole midd/lower face advencement with the nose included ?
lefort 1 + implant or modified lefort 2 ?

 

[Deleted member 20670]

im a good candidat for that whole midd/lower face advencement with the nose included ?
lefort 1 + implant or modified lefort 2 ?

You should get genioplasty.

 

[Pendejo]

It proves the point more because the projection looks even less when the head is turned.

Idk about that bro, I’ve noticed when you can see both eyebrows from the side the face looks less “flat” which might fool the untrained eye

 

[Deleted member 7725]

Can't a graft rhino or even nose filler accomplish the same thing and allow one to get more conventional surgeries? I'd also assume that without a forwrad grown browridge a projected nasion would look uncanny.

 

[RealSurgerymax]

Can't a graft rhino or even nose filler accomplish the same thing and allow one to get more conventional surgeries? I'd also assume that without a forwrad grown browridge a projected nasion would look uncanny.

Nose filler - just give up before doing something so dumb.

 

[tomakine]

You should get genioplasty.

Of course i should, but i feel my whole face lack of depth ( especially the the midd face/nose), im asking because i could be wrong too

 

[crosshold]

@RealSurgerymax do you do PEEK jaw implants?

 

[EnjoyerOf Water]

What about high quadrangular lefort 1? in this?

 

[Deleted member 20914]

@RealSurgerymax do you do PEEK jaw implants?

He has connection to top Cambodian surgeons who do bamboo implants (mogs peek)

 

[Deleted member 19957]

Shoulda went to Giant's.

 

[Mewton]

I have a recessed forehead but rest lower face is forward like your after pics
Is there any procedure that advances the forehead?

 

[tomakine]

Facial Depth is basically a refined version Forward Growth theory. While some people might say water is wet, this updated theory explains why many midface implant designs look fake and stuck-on, and why “Modified LeFort 3” (often abbreviated MLF3) has almost no chance of creating an extremely aesthetic face.
View attachment 2039450
View attachment 2039436
Here is how I separate and categorize facial depth.

Certain landmarks are constant and can’t be changed like the external auditory meatus, tragus, anterior/posterior positioning of the eyes, neck and to some extent the hyoid bone. These are the constant reference marks. Everything else can be moved forward with the properly modified surgeries.

It’s my opinion that the most overlooked subcategory of facial depth is anterior facial depth which is projection or retrusion in the LeFort 2 region. It’s probably the area which sets apart average people from beautiful people the most.

Anterior Facial Depth
(The projection of the central midface off the posterior midface and is enhanced through LeFort 2 Osteotomy)
View attachment 2039438
View attachment 2039439

Posterior Facial Depth
The projection of the entire face as a unit from the rest of the skull and corrected by a LeFort 3 Advancement or implants informed by the LeFort 3 Concept.
View attachment 2039443
View attachment 2039444

When all of the subcategories of facial depth are sufficiently projecting the face fits into a square shape:

View attachment 2039446
View attachment 2039447View attachment 2039448View attachment 2039449

Adding facial depth with a true LeFort II or III that goes up and over the nose can give a very powerful yet natural looking result. So-called ‘Modified’ LeFort 3 and LeFort 2 Osteotomies which leave out the nose and nasion can’t do this any better than custom implants can. Therefore it should never be utilized except in the implant-phobic.
View attachment 2039455
The main aesthetic problem with a non-syndrome LeFort II is the medial canthus is usually pulled too forward, off the eyeball. In the past this has required medial canthus setback procedure with a trans-nasal wire which is not natural appearing and only belongs in syndrome craniofacial surgery. However LeFort 2 can be modified to be in front of the medial canthus and lacrimal system as I did here:
View attachment 2039466

If you don’t want LeFort 2 or LeFort 3 I have found it possible to apply this concept to my implant designs after a LeFort 1 Osteotomy. How much depends on the advancement of the LF1. I have had success balancing faces after “over-advanced” bimaxes (LACOMS strikes again! Barcelona Line strikes again!) with specially designed custom implants.

View attachment 2039458

This is just one of many concepts that just about all custom implant designs & Orthognathic surgery plans never take into account, unless by accident. (Custom Implants are almost always designed by engineers at big companies who don’t know aesthetics. Meanwhile most surgeons don’t know 3D design engineering. It’s almost never the surgeon literally designing the implant - implants are just designed under their supervision/approval.)

That’s quite a bit of detail for a concept I have gatekept strictly for my own clients for about 2 years. More information about highly-modified Craniofacial surgery available on instagram @unicorn.CMF (professional page) and @Giant.Implants (educational meme page)

Also i have a question the implant coulent replace a lefort 2 the advancement of the nose in the lefort 2 cant be faked by implant no ?

 

[ezio6]

High iq ex incel autist marketing strategy , what does the future holds for looksmaxxing comunity ,

 

[ezio6]

Jfl accurate
View attachment 2041264

Deatchnic

 

[dakchuh]

this theory was explored by @thecel in the past and is more readily apparent in asians due to their natural lack of forward projection but its good to see it validated by an actual professional

Cranium > Maxilla (Brachycephaly Copers GTFIH!)

TL;DR: Related: https://looksmax.org/threads/brachycephalic-cranium-is-the-biggest-death-sentence.302833/ Cranium is the most important thing in aesthetics, ever. It's more important than maxilla. You can't have that "forward-grown male model look" if you don't have a long cranial...

looksmax.org

A flat nasal bridge kills any persons side profile

Literally impossible to have a good side profile with a flat nose bridge, this is probably old news but I just realized that pretty much all good side profiles have a high-set nose bridge

looksmax.org

there one was other thread where he specifically talks about this but icant find it

also why the biggest kpopmaxxers all have really good for asians upper maxilla to brow region



i like to call it the x zone or the hour glass zone because bones in this region are what really sets an asian apart



that said if you're asian you'll probably be gaslit out of LF2 by racist surgeons so you're probably shit out of luck

 

[Osteogenesis]

Posterior Facial Depth
The projection of the entire face as a unit from the rest of the skull and corrected by a LeFort 3 Advancement or implants informed by the LeFort 3 Concept.
View attachment 2039443
View attachment 2039444

That isn't enough. I need my orbitals advanced to increase the distance between my ears and eyes. I also guess one would have to include part of the sphenoid to not mess with the muscles

 

[UglyGod360]

What about him?

 

[SubhumanCurrycel]

High IQ thread, do you have some kind of bio engineering backround or smth?

Hes a surgeon

 

[Deleted member 17429]

Will you open Unicorn CMF to private stock investors/IPO? I would more then gladly be an angel investor.

 

[Deleted member 22705]

Make a thread about facial harmony please, I have enough forward growth and width but my facial features are hideously deformed due to not fitting together. No surgery can correct this, I desperately need a solution otherwise I will be roping with sodium nitrite.

 

[Deleted member 22829]

Make a thread about facial harmony please, I have enough forward growth and width but my facial features are hideously deformed due to not fitting together. No surgery can correct this, I desperately need a solution otherwise I will be roping with sodium nitrite.

Its been a while since I've seen u bro! Also your not forward grown or wide, most of that width is cause of weight.

 

[PointOfNoReturn]

Make a thread about facial harmony please, I have enough forward growth and width but my facial features are hideously deformed due to not fitting together. No surgery can correct this, I desperately need a solution otherwise I will be roping with sodium nitrite.

Good riddance

 

[Deleted member 20179]

Good thread as much as it pains me. Critical factor for IRL and in motion appeal. Truth is I look decent in selfies, it’s the short front to back projection that kept me from having forward growth, and that along with Assymetry (which I could maybe fix) kept me a virgin

 

[spark]

I know you hate bollards but if people are getting small but real results with a shitty facemask it's the way to go. It's also ten times cheaper and ten times less invasive. It might not work but it's still worth trying. You seem to disregard the idea all together.

There are several premises.
1) Orthos see results (albeit small) with a shitty facemask on CBCT scans
2) Bollards are proven to be vastly superior to a facemask https://www.pathlms.com/pcso/events/979/video_presentations/91348
3) If I can keep the sutures opened for a long time (large MSE movement) I could technically protract for many months

Custom plate le fort 1 + custom maxillary implants + custom implants near the orbital and nasion area would not only be insanely invasive but would likely cost like 100 thousand.

 

[RealSurgerymax]

I know you hate bollards but if people are getting small but real results with a shitty facemask it's the way to go. It's also ten times cheaper and ten times less invasive. It might not work but it's still worth trying. You seem to disregard the idea all together.

There are several premises.
1) Orthos see results (albeit small) with a shitty facemask on CBCT scans
2) Bollards are proven to be vastly superior to a facemask https://www.pathlms.com/pcso/events/979/video_presentations/91348
3) If I can keep the sutures opened for a long time (large MSE movement) I could technically protract for many months

Custom plate le fort 1 + custom maxillary implants + custom implants near the orbital and nasion area would not only be insanely invasive but would likely cost like 100 thousand.

Why spend $50K on a car when you can spend $100 on a skateboard type reasoning.

 

[RealSurgerymax]

Will you open Unicorn CMF to private stock investors/IPO? I would more then gladly be an angel investor.

Just partners before FDA 510K phase.

 

[spark]

Why spend $50K on a car when you can spend $100 on a skateboard type reasoning.

Do you really think there is no way in getting substantial forward growth with bollards? Mahony said he's gotten even more than 2mm in adult males with a crappy MSE+FM and he uses CBCT in each patient so unless he is lying that's some major stuff. Studies have shown that in kids bollards get like double the growth compared to hyrax+FM. I also think it could be possible to use a bollards & MSE+FM all at the same time. Coupled with IMDO for the lower you could then achieve 100% bone growth without any implants screws or plates.

 

[Magnum Opus]

These are close enough and and still good facial depth to height ratio. But approaching 1:1 is still the ideal given the face isn’t short which my example is not.

View attachment 2040333View attachment 2040334View attachment 2040339


one of the examples you posted is one of the best examples of facial depth and you made the box longer than it should be
View attachment 2040353

Further the préexistant amount of facial depth or shallowness predicts how good of a LF1-level bimax result you can get

View attachment 2040354
Everyone knows this case because of how good a beforw and after it is by a Raffaini (some of it is puberty) but he is also the perfect bimax candidate since he has a deep face but also an extremely retruded face by SNA and ANB at the same time.
View attachment 2040359
People with shallow face like above will get bimax advancements with disappointing results like many cases on this forum last year.


View attachment 2040351View attachment 2040352 Not short faced.

Can I dm you for bimax advice?

 

[HighClassMaxing]

@Alexanderr botb asap

 

[Pei]

Facial Depth is basically a refined version Forward Growth theory. While some people might say water is wet, this updated theory explains why many midface implant designs look fake and stuck-on, and why “Modified LeFort 3” (often abbreviated MLF3) has almost no chance of creating an extremely aesthetic face.
View attachment 2039450
View attachment 2039436
Here is how I separate and categorize facial depth.

Certain landmarks are constant and can’t be changed like the external auditory meatus, tragus, anterior/posterior positioning of the eyes, neck and to some extent the hyoid bone. These are the constant reference marks. Everything else can be moved forward with the properly modified surgeries.

It’s my opinion that the most overlooked subcategory of facial depth is anterior facial depth which is projection or retrusion in the LeFort 2 region. It’s probably the area which sets apart average people from beautiful people the most.

Anterior Facial Depth
(The projection of the central midface off the posterior midface and is enhanced through LeFort 2 Osteotomy)
View attachment 2039438
View attachment 2039439

Posterior Facial Depth
The projection of the entire face as a unit from the rest of the skull and corrected by a LeFort 3 Advancement or implants informed by the LeFort 3 Concept.
View attachment 2039443
View attachment 2039444

When all of the subcategories of facial depth are sufficiently projecting the face fits into a square shape:

View attachment 2039446
View attachment 2039447View attachment 2039448View attachment 2039449

Adding facial depth with a true LeFort II or III that goes up and over the nose can give a very powerful yet natural looking result. So-called ‘Modified’ LeFort 3 and LeFort 2 Osteotomies which leave out the nose and nasion can’t do this any better than custom implants can. Therefore it should never be utilized except in the implant-phobic.
View attachment 2039455
The main aesthetic problem with a non-syndrome LeFort II is the medial canthus is usually pulled too forward, off the eyeball. In the past this has required medial canthus setback procedure with a trans-nasal wire which is not natural appearing and only belongs in syndrome craniofacial surgery. However LeFort 2 can be modified to be in front of the medial canthus and lacrimal system as I did here:
View attachment 2039466

If you don’t want LeFort 2 or LeFort 3 I have found it possible to apply this concept to my implant designs after a LeFort 1 Osteotomy. How much depends on the advancement of the LF1. I have had success balancing faces after “over-advanced” bimaxes (LACOMS strikes again! Barcelona Line strikes again!) with specially designed custom implants.

View attachment 2039458

This is just one of many concepts that just about all custom implant designs & Orthognathic surgery plans never take into account, unless by accident. (Custom Implants are almost always designed by engineers at big companies who don’t know aesthetics. Meanwhile most surgeons don’t know 3D design engineering. It’s almost never the surgeon literally designing the implant - implants are just designed under their supervision/approval.)

That’s quite a bit of detail for a concept I have gatekept strictly for my own clients for about 2 years. More information about highly-modified Craniofacial surgery available on instagram @unicorn.CMF (professional page) and @Giant.Implants (educational meme page)

Does Nicki Minaj have more depth than even Barrett

Facial Depth is basically a refined version Forward Growth theory. While some people might say water is wet, this updated theory explains why many midface implant designs look fake and stuck-on, and why “Modified LeFort 3” (often abbreviated MLF3) has almost no chance of creating an extremely aesthetic face.
View attachment 2039450
View attachment 2039436
Here is how I separate and categorize facial depth.

Certain landmarks are constant and can’t be changed like the external auditory meatus, tragus, anterior/posterior positioning of the eyes, neck and to some extent the hyoid bone. These are the constant reference marks. Everything else can be moved forward with the properly modified surgeries.

It’s my opinion that the most overlooked subcategory of facial depth is anterior facial depth which is projection or retrusion in the LeFort 2 region. It’s probably the area which sets apart average people from beautiful people the most.

Anterior Facial Depth
(The projection of the central midface off the posterior midface and is enhanced through LeFort 2 Osteotomy)
View attachment 2039438
View attachment 2039439

Posterior Facial Depth
The projection of the entire face as a unit from the rest of the skull and corrected by a LeFort 3 Advancement or implants informed by the LeFort 3 Concept.
View attachment 2039443
View attachment 2039444

When all of the subcategories of facial depth are sufficiently projecting the face fits into a square shape:

View attachment 2039446
View attachment 2039447View attachment 2039448View attachment 2039449

Adding facial depth with a true LeFort II or III that goes up and over the nose can give a very powerful yet natural looking result. So-called ‘Modified’ LeFort 3 and LeFort 2 Osteotomies which leave out the nose and nasion can’t do this any better than custom implants can. Therefore it should never be utilized except in the implant-phobic.
View attachment 2039455
The main aesthetic problem with a non-syndrome LeFort II is the medial canthus is usually pulled too forward, off the eyeball. In the past this has required medial canthus setback procedure with a trans-nasal wire which is not natural appearing and only belongs in syndrome craniofacial surgery. However LeFort 2 can be modified to be in front of the medial canthus and lacrimal system as I did here:
View attachment 2039466

If you don’t want LeFort 2 or LeFort 3 I have found it possible to apply this concept to my implant designs after a LeFort 1 Osteotomy. How much depends on the advancement of the LF1. I have had success balancing faces after “over-advanced” bimaxes (LACOMS strikes again! Barcelona Line strikes again!) with specially designed custom implants.

View attachment 2039458

This is just one of many concepts that just about all custom implant designs & Orthognathic surgery plans never take into account, unless by accident. (Custom Implants are almost always designed by engineers at big companies who don’t know aesthetics. Meanwhile most surgeons don’t know 3D design engineering. It’s almost never the surgeon literally designing the implant - implants are just designed under their supervision/approval.)

That’s quite a bit of detail for a concept I have gatekept strictly for my own clients for about 2 years. More information about highly-modified Craniofacial surgery available on instagram @unicorn.CMF (professional page) and @Giant.Implants (educational meme page)

does Nicki Minaj have even more depth than barrett

 

[Pei]

Does Nicki Minaj have better depth than Barrett?

 

[Pei]

Facial Depth is basically a refined version Forward Growth theory. While some people might say water is wet, this updated theory explains why many midface implant designs look fake and stuck-on, and why “Modified LeFort 3” (often abbreviated MLF3) has almost no chance of creating an extremely aesthetic face.
View attachment 2039450
View attachment 2039436
Here is how I separate and categorize facial depth.

Certain landmarks are constant and can’t be changed like the external auditory meatus, tragus, anterior/posterior positioning of the eyes, neck and to some extent the hyoid bone. These are the constant reference marks. Everything else can be moved forward with the properly modified surgeries.

It’s my opinion that the most overlooked subcategory of facial depth is anterior facial depth which is projection or retrusion in the LeFort 2 region. It’s probably the area which sets apart average people from beautiful people the most.

Anterior Facial Depth
(The projection of the central midface off the posterior midface and is enhanced through LeFort 2 Osteotomy)
View attachment 2039438
View attachment 2039439

Posterior Facial Depth
The projection of the entire face as a unit from the rest of the skull and corrected by a LeFort 3 Advancement or implants informed by the LeFort 3 Concept.
View attachment 2039443
View attachment 2039444

When all of the subcategories of facial depth are sufficiently projecting the face fits into a square shape:

View attachment 2039446
View attachment 2039447View attachment 2039448View attachment 2039449

Adding facial depth with a true LeFort II or III that goes up and over the nose can give a very powerful yet natural looking result. So-called ‘Modified’ LeFort 3 and LeFort 2 Osteotomies which leave out the nose and nasion can’t do this any better than custom implants can. Therefore it should never be utilized except in the implant-phobic.
View attachment 2039455
The main aesthetic problem with a non-syndrome LeFort II is the medial canthus is usually pulled too forward, off the eyeball. In the past this has required medial canthus setback procedure with a trans-nasal wire which is not natural appearing and only belongs in syndrome craniofacial surgery. However LeFort 2 can be modified to be in front of the medial canthus and lacrimal system as I did here:
View attachment 2039466

If you don’t want LeFort 2 or LeFort 3 I have found it possible to apply this concept to my implant designs after a LeFort 1 Osteotomy. How much depends on the advancement of the LF1. I have had success balancing faces after “over-advanced” bimaxes (LACOMS strikes again! Barcelona Line strikes again!) with specially designed custom implants.

View attachment 2039458

This is just one of many concepts that just about all custom implant designs & Orthognathic surgery plans never take into account, unless by accident. (Custom Implants are almost always designed by engineers at big companies who don’t know aesthetics. Meanwhile most surgeons don’t know 3D design engineering. It’s almost never the surgeon literally designing the implant - implants are just designed under their supervision/approval.)

That’s quite a bit of detail for a concept I have gatekept strictly for my own clients for about 2 years. More information about highly-modified Craniofacial surgery available on instagram @unicorn.CMF (professional page) and @Giant.Implants (educational meme page)

Fuck man please make more posts like this or link other sources on it there’s like nothing on this

 

[FuckassBitchass]

Genuinely good thread. Says everything I’ve known forever in a succinct way.

My problem: wtf is my solution realistically. My forehead is too far back. The whole face. It’s skull/head at this point, not even jaws or face.

I’ve also noticed it means losing less hair weirdly, because the skull isn’t as long, meaning hair recession isn’t as bad I think.

 

[Pei]

Genuinely good thread. Says everything I’ve known forever in a succinct way.

My problem: wtf is my solution realistically. My forehead is too far back. The whole face. It’s skull/head at this point, not even jaws or face.

I’ve also noticed it means losing less hair weirdly, because the skull isn’t as long, meaning hair recession isn’t as bad I think.

There is prob no solution, no surgery will give you more midface after you’re done with development lol

 

[FuckassBitchass]

There is prob no solution, no surgery will give you more midface after you’re done with development lol

Wait you mean no surgery can advance the mid face? Isn’t that exactly what upper jaw surgery can do?

Im just confused what you mean by “more mid face”.

 

[Pei]

Facial Depth is basically a refined version Forward Growth theory. While some people might say water is wet, this updated theory explains why many midface implant designs look fake and stuck-on, and why “Modified LeFort 3” (often abbreviated MLF3) has almost no chance of creating an extremely aesthetic face.
View attachment 2039450
View attachment 2039436
Here is how I separate and categorize facial depth.

Certain landmarks are constant and can’t be changed like the external auditory meatus, tragus, anterior/posterior positioning of the eyes, neck and to some extent the hyoid bone. These are the constant reference marks. Everything else can be moved forward with the properly modified surgeries.

It’s my opinion that the most overlooked subcategory of facial depth is anterior facial depth which is projection or retrusion in the LeFort 2 region. It’s probably the area which sets apart average people from beautiful people the most.

Anterior Facial Depth
(The projection of the central midface off the posterior midface and is enhanced through LeFort 2 Osteotomy)
View attachment 2039438
View attachment 2039439

Posterior Facial Depth
The projection of the entire face as a unit from the rest of the skull and corrected by a LeFort 3 Advancement or implants informed by the LeFort 3 Concept.
View attachment 2039443
View attachment 2039444

When all of the subcategories of facial depth are sufficiently projecting the face fits into a square shape:

View attachment 2039446
View attachment 2039447View attachment 2039448View attachment 2039449

Adding facial depth with a true LeFort II or III that goes up and over the nose can give a very powerful yet natural looking result. So-called ‘Modified’ LeFort 3 and LeFort 2 Osteotomies which leave out the nose and nasion can’t do this any better than custom implants can. Therefore it should never be utilized except in the implant-phobic.
View attachment 2039455
The main aesthetic problem with a non-syndrome LeFort II is the medial canthus is usually pulled too forward, off the eyeball. In the past this has required medial canthus setback procedure with a trans-nasal wire which is not natural appearing and only belongs in syndrome craniofacial surgery. However LeFort 2 can be modified to be in front of the medial canthus and lacrimal system as I did here:
View attachment 2039466

If you don’t want LeFort 2 or LeFort 3 I have found it possible to apply this concept to my implant designs after a LeFort 1 Osteotomy. How much depends on the advancement of the LF1. I have had success balancing faces after “over-advanced” bimaxes (LACOMS strikes again! Barcelona Line strikes again!) with specially designed custom implants.

View attachment 2039458

This is just one of many concepts that just about all custom implant designs & Orthognathic surgery plans never take into account, unless by accident. (Custom Implants are almost always designed by engineers at big companies who don’t know aesthetics. Meanwhile most surgeons don’t know 3D design engineering. It’s almost never the surgeon literally designing the implant - implants are just designed under their supervision/approval.)

That’s quite a bit of detail for a concept I have gatekept strictly for my own clients for about 2 years. More information about highly-modified Craniofacial surgery available on instagram @unicorn.CMF (professional page) and @Giant.Implants (educational meme page)

You on YouTube?

 

[MulattoTrenMaxxer]

I wonder what the scar on those forehead implants looks like

 

[fruitgunpop]

The guy on the left is facing towards the camera whilst the guy on the right is facing away. I think this theory does not take camera angles into account.

No, the guy on the left has his head turned slightly (can see his other eyebrow) and the guy on the right is looking at it head-on. This only proves the point even more.

This is a classic oldie picture if you don’t like it you can consult the several other pictures I posted.

It proves the point more because the projection looks even less when the head is turned.

RSM out of everything you said, this is the only thing I don't agree with
I'm not playing gotcha w u. You're the expert.
I honestly want to know why u think that's true cos its totally wrong.
The percieved facial depth actually increases the more the head is angled towards the camera.
On the other hand, the perceived depth decreases when the face is angled away from the camera
This is a common frauding technique actually.


Take a look at these meeks pictures for
Ex.

In this picture he has more perceived browridge forward growth and facial depth cos his head is angled towards the camera.
That is because the lateral supras on the other side of the face that is not facing the camera is exposed, therefore increasing perceived supra forward growth.
It's the same principle with facial depth.
Ex. 2

While in this pic he has less perceived forward growth and facial depth cos his head is angled/turned away from the camera.

Side by side:

Another set of examples:

But even still, the second Cavill pic is still not a perfect profile pic cos the camera is angled from below and from the front instead of being dead center from the side at head level.

This is a bad example cos Cox's head is significantly angled towards the camera and by doing so increases his perceived supra and facial depth while the other dude's head is angled away from the camera.

Hence why some retards here use these pics to argue that Opry and Chico are recessed even tho their heads are angled/turned away from the camera in these photos. Not to mention they're both tilting their heads down.

Again I'm not playing gotcha w u or make it seem like I'm smarter or some shit like that.
Its just that the results would be inaccurate if you're using pics of models where their heads are angled/turned towards the camera for implant design model reference and surgery planning because those pics wouldn't represent their actual supraorbital and facial depth at all.
Same concern w using pics of models where their head are instead angled/turned away from the camera.

The ideal head angle in profile photo is when the glabella is barely or not exposed at all and the camera should be dead center from the side.
Like these ones:

The square test is terrible
View attachment 2040287View attachment 2040274View attachment 2040275
that guy in the example has a vertically short face probably looks like a neotenous baby from the front

The Square test is failing because diff camera angles weren't taken into consideration.

@NegativeNorwood
@RealSurgerymax
@StrangerDanger

 

[fruitgunpop]

RSM out of everything you said, this is the only thing I don't agree with
I'm not playing gotcha w u. You're the expert.
I honestly want to know why u think that's true cos its totally wrong.
The percieved facial depth actually increases the more the head is angled towards the camera.
On the other hand, the perceived depth decreases when the face is angled away from the camera
This is a common frauding technique actually.


Take a look at these meeks pictures for
Ex.
View attachment 2315210
In this picture he has more perceived browridge forward growth and facial depth cos his head is angled towards the camera.
That is because the lateral supras on the other side of the face that is not facing the camera is exposed, therefore increasing perceived supra forward growth.
It's the same principle with facial depth.
Ex. 2
View attachment 2315211
While in this pic he has less perceived forward growth and facial depth cos his head is angled/turned away from the camera.

Side by side:
View attachment 2315213View attachment 2315214

Another set of examples:
View attachment 2315249View attachment 2315253
But even still, the second Cavill pic is still not a perfect profile pic cos the camera is angled from below and from the front instead of being dead center from the side at head level.



View attachment 2315217
This is a bad example cos Cox's head is significantly angled towards the camera and by doing so increases his perceived supra and facial depth while the other dude's head is angled away from the camera.

View attachment 2315218View attachment 2315232
Hence why some retards here use these pics to argue that Opry and Chico are recessed even tho their heads are angled/turned away from the camera in these photos. Not to mention they're both tilting their heads down.

Again I'm not playing gotcha w u or make it seem like I'm smarter or some shit like that.
Its just that the results would be inaccurate if you're using pics of models where their heads are angled/turned towards the camera for implant design model reference and surgery planning because those pics wouldn't represent their actual supraorbital and facial depth at all.
Same concern w using pics of models where their head are instead angled/turned away from the camera.

The ideal head angle in profile photo is when the glabella is barely or not exposed at all and the camera should be dead center from the side.
Like these ones:
View attachment 2315236View attachment 2315237View attachment 2315240View attachment 2315242View attachment 2315245


The Square test is failing because diff camera angles weren't taken into consideration.

@NegativeNorwood
@RealSurgerymax
@StrangerDanger

Wait a sec I used the wrong Chico profile pic in that msg.
These two pics are closer to the ideal.

Another example.
Observe how the depth of his supras, nasion and face lessens as he gradually turns his face away from the camera

@NegativeNorwood
@RealSurgerymax

 

[Pei]

Facial Depth is basically a refined version Forward Growth theory. While some people might say water is wet, this updated theory explains why many midface implant designs look fake and stuck-on, and why “Modified LeFort 3” (often abbreviated MLF3) has almost no chance of creating an extremely aesthetic face.
View attachment 2039450
View attachment 2039436
Here is how I separate and categorize facial depth.

Certain landmarks are constant and can’t be changed like the external auditory meatus, tragus, anterior/posterior positioning of the eyes, neck and to some extent the hyoid bone. These are the constant reference marks. Everything else can be moved forward with the properly modified surgeries.

It’s my opinion that the most overlooked subcategory of facial depth is anterior facial depth which is projection or retrusion in the LeFort 2 region. It’s probably the area which sets apart average people from beautiful people the most.

Anterior Facial Depth
(The projection of the central midface off the posterior midface and is enhanced through LeFort 2 Osteotomy)
View attachment 2039438
View attachment 2039439

Posterior Facial Depth
The projection of the entire face as a unit from the rest of the skull and corrected by a LeFort 3 Advancement or implants informed by the LeFort 3 Concept.
View attachment 2039443
View attachment 2039444

When all of the subcategories of facial depth are sufficiently projecting the face fits into a square shape:

View attachment 2039446
View attachment 2039447View attachment 2039448View attachment 2039449

Adding facial depth with a true LeFort II or III that goes up and over the nose can give a very powerful yet natural looking result. So-called ‘Modified’ LeFort 3 and LeFort 2 Osteotomies which leave out the nose and nasion can’t do this any better than custom implants can. Therefore it should never be utilized except in the implant-phobic.
View attachment 2039455
The main aesthetic problem with a non-syndrome LeFort II is the medial canthus is usually pulled too forward, off the eyeball. In the past this has required medial canthus setback procedure with a trans-nasal wire which is not natural appearing and only belongs in syndrome craniofacial surgery. However LeFort 2 can be modified to be in front of the medial canthus and lacrimal system as I did here:
View attachment 2039466

If you don’t want LeFort 2 or LeFort 3 I have found it possible to apply this concept to my implant designs after a LeFort 1 Osteotomy. How much depends on the advancement of the LF1. I have had success balancing faces after “over-advanced” bimaxes (LACOMS strikes again! Barcelona Line strikes again!) with specially designed custom implants.

View attachment 2039458

This is just one of many concepts that just about all custom implant designs & Orthognathic surgery plans never take into account, unless by accident. (Custom Implants are almost always designed by engineers at big companies who don’t know aesthetics. Meanwhile most surgeons don’t know 3D design engineering. It’s almost never the surgeon literally designing the implant - implants are just designed under their supervision/approval.)

That’s quite a bit of detail for a concept I have gatekept strictly for my own clients for about 2 years. More information about highly-modified Craniofacial surgery available on instagram @unicorn.CMF (professional page) and @Giant.Implants (educational meme page)

What is it about faces with this that are so beautiful? Like why does nature make us see these faces in that way?

 

[Fairytale]

 

[tomakine]

Wait a sec I used the wrong Chico profile pic in that msg.
These two pics are closer to the ideal.
View attachment 2315426View attachment 2315445

Another example.
Observe how the depth of his supras, nasion and face lessens as he gradually turns his face away from the camera
View attachment 2315437View attachment 2315438View attachment 2315439View attachment 2315444
@NegativeNorwood
@RealSurgerymax

Make sense

 

[Pei]

Facial Depth is basically a refined version Forward Growth theory. While some people might say water is wet, this updated theory explains why many midface implant designs look fake and stuck-on, and why “Modified LeFort 3” (often abbreviated MLF3) has almost no chance of creating an extremely aesthetic face.
View attachment 2039450
View attachment 2039436
Here is how I separate and categorize facial depth.

Certain landmarks are constant and can’t be changed like the external auditory meatus, tragus, anterior/posterior positioning of the eyes, neck and to some extent the hyoid bone. These are the constant reference marks. Everything else can be moved forward with the properly modified surgeries.

It’s my opinion that the most overlooked subcategory of facial depth is anterior facial depth which is projection or retrusion in the LeFort 2 region. It’s probably the area which sets apart average people from beautiful people the most.

Anterior Facial Depth
(The projection of the central midface off the posterior midface and is enhanced through LeFort 2 Osteotomy)
View attachment 2039438
View attachment 2039439

Posterior Facial Depth
The projection of the entire face as a unit from the rest of the skull and corrected by a LeFort 3 Advancement or implants informed by the LeFort 3 Concept.
View attachment 2039443
View attachment 2039444

When all of the subcategories of facial depth are sufficiently projecting the face fits into a square shape:

View attachment 2039446
View attachment 2039447View attachment 2039448View attachment 2039449

Adding facial depth with a true LeFort II or III that goes up and over the nose can give a very powerful yet natural looking result. So-called ‘Modified’ LeFort 3 and LeFort 2 Osteotomies which leave out the nose and nasion can’t do this any better than custom implants can. Therefore it should never be utilized except in the implant-phobic.
View attachment 2039455
The main aesthetic problem with a non-syndrome LeFort II is the medial canthus is usually pulled too forward, off the eyeball. In the past this has required medial canthus setback procedure with a trans-nasal wire which is not natural appearing and only belongs in syndrome craniofacial surgery. However LeFort 2 can be modified to be in front of the medial canthus and lacrimal system as I did here:
View attachment 2039466

If you don’t want LeFort 2 or LeFort 3 I have found it possible to apply this concept to my implant designs after a LeFort 1 Osteotomy. How much depends on the advancement of the LF1. I have had success balancing faces after “over-advanced” bimaxes (LACOMS strikes again! Barcelona Line strikes again!) with specially designed custom implants.

View attachment 2039458

This is just one of many concepts that just about all custom implant designs & Orthognathic surgery plans never take into account, unless by accident. (Custom Implants are almost always designed by engineers at big companies who don’t know aesthetics. Meanwhile most surgeons don’t know 3D design engineering. It’s almost never the surgeon literally designing the implant - implants are just designed under their supervision/approval.)

That’s quite a bit of detail for a concept I have gatekept strictly for my own clients for about 2 years. More information about highly-modified Craniofacial surgery available on instagram @unicorn.CMF (professional page) and @Giant.Implants (educational meme page)

Where does cheekbones or zygos fit into this because they also account for beauty too

 

[Pei]

Facial Depth is basically a refined version Forward Growth theory. While some people might say water is wet, this updated theory explains why many midface implant designs look fake and stuck-on, and why “Modified LeFort 3” (often abbreviated MLF3) has almost no chance of creating an extremely aesthetic face.
View attachment 2039450
View attachment 2039436
Here is how I separate and categorize facial depth.

Certain landmarks are constant and can’t be changed like the external auditory meatus, tragus, anterior/posterior positioning of the eyes, neck and to some extent the hyoid bone. These are the constant reference marks. Everything else can be moved forward with the properly modified surgeries.

It’s my opinion that the most overlooked subcategory of facial depth is anterior facial depth which is projection or retrusion in the LeFort 2 region. It’s probably the area which sets apart average people from beautiful people the most.

Anterior Facial Depth
(The projection of the central midface off the posterior midface and is enhanced through LeFort 2 Osteotomy)
View attachment 2039438
View attachment 2039439

Posterior Facial Depth
The projection of the entire face as a unit from the rest of the skull and corrected by a LeFort 3 Advancement or implants informed by the LeFort 3 Concept.
View attachment 2039443
View attachment 2039444

When all of the subcategories of facial depth are sufficiently projecting the face fits into a square shape:

View attachment 2039446
View attachment 2039447View attachment 2039448View attachment 2039449

Adding facial depth with a true LeFort II or III that goes up and over the nose can give a very powerful yet natural looking result. So-called ‘Modified’ LeFort 3 and LeFort 2 Osteotomies which leave out the nose and nasion can’t do this any better than custom implants can. Therefore it should never be utilized except in the implant-phobic.
View attachment 2039455
The main aesthetic problem with a non-syndrome LeFort II is the medial canthus is usually pulled too forward, off the eyeball. In the past this has required medial canthus setback procedure with a trans-nasal wire which is not natural appearing and only belongs in syndrome craniofacial surgery. However LeFort 2 can be modified to be in front of the medial canthus and lacrimal system as I did here:
View attachment 2039466

If you don’t want LeFort 2 or LeFort 3 I have found it possible to apply this concept to my implant designs after a LeFort 1 Osteotomy. How much depends on the advancement of the LF1. I have had success balancing faces after “over-advanced” bimaxes (LACOMS strikes again! Barcelona Line strikes again!) with specially designed custom implants.

View attachment 2039458

This is just one of many concepts that just about all custom implant designs & Orthognathic surgery plans never take into account, unless by accident. (Custom Implants are almost always designed by engineers at big companies who don’t know aesthetics. Meanwhile most surgeons don’t know 3D design engineering. It’s almost never the surgeon literally designing the implant - implants are just designed under their supervision/approval.)

That’s quite a bit of detail for a concept I have gatekept strictly for my own clients for about 2 years. More information about highly-modified Craniofacial surgery available on instagram @unicorn.CMF (professional page) and @Giant.Implants (educational meme page)

Make another post like this pls

 

[Acne Victim]

Just lol at a thread of this quality not being on BOTB but some giga cope horrible ones filled with pseudoscience bs being there.

@Alexanderr

 

[randomvanish]

Even Henry Cavill got a ratio like FH / FW ==> 0,79~074

I think this ratio is extreme as hell. @RealSurgerymax

 

[randomvanish]

@SurgeryEnjoyer review this

Even Henry Cavill got a ratio like FH / FW ==> 0,79~074

I think this ratio is extreme as hell. @RealSurgerymax

 

[SurgeryEnjoyer]

@SurgeryEnjoyer review this

Sorry to disappoint, but i’m not knowledgeable on this.